UK Snubs Council of Europe Over Assange Inquiry
Politicians across Europe want Britain to investigate why the WikiLeaks founder spent five years in jail.
MARK CURTIS, 25 October 2024, https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-snubs-council-of-europe-over-assange-inquiry/
Britain’s Home Office is making a “grave mistake” by ignoring a call from the Council of Europe to review its treatment of Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder’s wife has warned.
The Council’s parliamentary assembly, of which the UK is a member, passed a resolution earlier this month designating Assange as a “political prisoner”.
Assange endured five years in Belmarsh maximum security prison in London before being released in June, and flying to his native Australia. The UK government had incarcerated him while the US pursued extradition proceedings in the British courts.
His treatment has outraged the Council of Europe, which was created in the aftermath of World War Two with strong backing from Winston Churchill.
Its resolution urged the UK authorities to conduct a review “with a view to establishing whether he [Assange] has been exposed to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, pursuant to their international obligations”.
It found the UK authorities “failed to effectively protect Mr Assange’s freedom of expression and right to liberty, exposing him to lengthy detention in a high-security prison despite the political nature of the most severe charges against him.”
Declassified asked Britain’s Home Office what its response was to the Council of Europe’s call.
The government department deflected the question, replying: “The longstanding extradition request for Julian Assange has been resolved. As is standard practice, all extradition requests are considered on an individual basis by our independent courts and in accordance with UK law.”
The demands of the parliamentary assembly are not binding on European governments but they are “obliged to respond”.
‘Cover-up’
Stella Assange, Julian’s wife, told Declassified the Home Office is making a “grave mistake” in refusing to heed the Council of Europe’s call.
She said: “We know that the Crown Prosecution Service has disappeared key documents relating to Julian’s imprisonment and refused to provide information, first to a journalist, and now to the court, that might shed a light on the political side of Julian’s persecution in the UK.
“It is one thing for rogue elements in the CPS to collude with foreign governments to persecute a publisher and attempt to cover their tracks. It is quite another for the UK government to stonewall in this manner in the wake of an independent report by the Council of Europe and a vote by the overwhelming majority of the chamber calling on the UK to carry out an investigation.”
She added: “The UK government is effectively partaking in the cover-up, in a way that only a guilty party would.”
‘Psychological torture’
Assange’s detention in maximum security Belmarsh was “out of proportion in relation to his alleged offence”, the Council of Europe’s resolution found.
It recalled the findings of the then United Nations special rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, that Assange had been exposed to “progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as psychological torture”.
Melzer’s report, produced in 2019 while Assange had secured asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, called on UK officials to be investigated for possible “criminal conduct” in their treatment of Assange. It was never reported in the UK national media.
The Council of Europe found that the UK authorities “appear to have ignored” Melzer’s findings.
Its resolution was passed with 88 in favour, 13 against and 20 abstentions. All four UK members of the parliamentary assembly voted against, including Lord Richard Keen, a Conservative peer, who expressed a dissenting opinion.
Keen argued that it was “legally incorrect” to find that Assange had been detained unlawfully, as he had violated bail conditions before and was considered a flight risk.
Keen also rejected the accusation of torture against the UK, saying that Assange’s “regrettable psychological state” identified by Melzer was due to Assange’s “self-imposed lengthy isolation in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and cannot be blamed on the UK authorities.”
‘Chilling effect’
The Council of Europe concluded that the treatment of Assange “creates a dangerous chilling effect and a climate of self-censorship affecting all journalists, publishers and others reporting matters essential for the functioning of a democratic society”.
It added: “It severely undermines the role of the press and the protection of journalists and whistle-blowers around the world.”
The resolution also noted that the Council was “alarmed” by reports that the US Central Intelligence Agency had covertly surveyed Assange while he was in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and was allegedly developing plans to poison or even assassinate him on UK soil.
Rebecca Vincent, campaigns director at Reporters Without Borders, told us that Julian Assange’s sentencing by UK courts to 50 weeks in prison for breaking bail was “disproportionate”.
She added: “His subsequent prolonged detention in a high-security prison with no charges against him in the UK, held purely on remand, constituted a gross violation of his rights.”
Vincent said: “We faced unusual restrictions from UK authorities in trying to do our jobs advocating in this case, including extreme difficulties securing consistent access to monitor extradition proceedings against Assange in UK courts, and access to visit him in Belmarsh prison. These aspects all merit a serious independent review.”
Fighting for More Evidence of Assange’s Political Prosecution
Italian journalist Stefania Maurizi has been in court trying to get some missing emails — or data about them — that could further expose the political motivation behind the prosecution of the WikiLeaks publisher.
Joe Lauria and Mohamed Elmaazi / Consortium News, October 23, 2024
A tribunal in Britain is set to decide whether to order the government’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to prove it deleted emails that may have covered up more evidence of a politically motivated prosecution of Julian Assange.
The three judges heard arguments on Sept. 24 in the nearly decade-long freedom of information saga regarding the emails that top British prosecutors say were deleted.
They involved an exchange with Sweden during a Swedish prosecutor’s attempt, beginning in 2010, to extradite the WikiLeaks publisher from Britain. ……………………………………………………….
It was only when the U.S. realized it would lose on appeal after a four-year extradition battle that the Department of Justice cut a plea deal with Assange who was released on June 24 and returned to his native Australia.
Assange had been charged in the United States under the Espionage Act for possessing and publishing defense information, which revealed evidence of U.S. war crimes.
Britain took an active role in Assange’s prosecution. Its Crown Prosecution Service sought to stop Sweden from going to the embassy to question him.
Seeking to learn more about Britain’s role against Assange, Italian investigative journalist Stefania Maurizi first made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2015 for all emails between the British and Swedish governments concerning Assange.
Some of the emails she obtained showed political motivation on the part of the lead British prosecutor, Paul Close. One email Maurizi obtained from the Swedish Prosecution Authority (SPA) revealed that Close appeared to be pressuring Swedish prosecutors to continue seeking Assange’s extradition instead of dropping the case or questioning him at the Ecuadorian embassy, where Assange had been granted asylum………………………….
After Maurizi noticed a sizeable gap in the emails released to her she filed another FIOA seeking to obtain the missing emails.
The CPS first claimed that it had destroyed the emails. It said that when Close retired, his account along with his emails, were automatically destroyed.
But Maurizi did not buy it. She asked the court at the hearing last month to order the CPS to turn over “metadata” — data about data, such as file creation and modification dates, email sender and recipient addresses, timestamps, email routing information, keywords, and subject lines — proving the emails really were deleted and when.
“We have NO certainty whatsoever” that the emails were destroyed, Maurizi wrote in a message to Consortium News. Maurizi is in court because she believes the allegedly deleted emails could provide additional evidence of a politically motivated prosecution of Assange.
……………………………………………‘When, How & Why’ Were the Emails Deleted?
Maurizi, who travelled to London from Rome to attend the Sept. 24 hearing at the First-Tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber), is challenging the ongoing failure of the CPS to respond adequately to her December 2019 FOIA about the missing emails.
………………………………………………………………….Maurizi is betting the tribunal will agree with her that metadata is clearly information that can be requested under the Act and which can clearly be provided with little difficulty. If she succeeds, future FOIA requests will also be able to demand metadata if and when an individual thinks it may be useful.
Hillary, who was called to testify for the CPS, freely admitted to the tribunal that she could easily provide the metadata Maurizi requested and that she would be happy to do so, as long as any information which identified individuals is redacted.
The tribunal will also consider whether to “order the CPS to carry out a proper, full search for information held” as to “when, how and why?” the thousands of emails were allegedly deleted while Assange’s Swedish extradition case was still very much active.
No date has yet been set for the announcement of the tribunal’s decision. https://consortiumnews.com/2024/10/23/fighting-for-more-evidence-of-assanges-political-prosecution/
Cost overruns at Sellafield nuclear waste site to hit £136bn
Storage facility is not delivering value for money as large projects are running
behind schedule, warns spending watchdog.
The cost of managing Britain’s most hazardous nuclear waste has risen by almost a fifth to £136 billion due to a failure to set a realistic budget, the government’s spending
watchdog has concluded.
Sellafield, which is home to about 85 per cent of the UK’s nuclear waste and stores the most hazardous waste, is not delivering value for money as large projects are running behind schedule and over budget, according to the National Audit Office’s latest
assessment.
The site in Cumbria is operated by the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority (NDA), a mainly taxpayer-funded body, and over its lifetime will
retrieve about 3.3 million m3 of waste from ageing facilities and store it
in more modern silos. The cost of maintaining the site into the next
century, when Sellafield is scheduled for demolition, is likely to cost
£136 billion after adjusting for inflation, up from £84 billion at March
2019, but could run to £253 billion under a worst-case scenario.
None of the budgets for the four big projects under way at Sellafield in 2018, when
the audit office last scrutinised the waste storage site, accounted for
“optimism bias”, which assumes work will be delivered on time and
within budget. More realistic costings were only included in 2018, despite
the watchdog recommending the NDA require Sellafield to do so in 2012.
There has been some progress made since the National Audit Office last
scrutinised Sellafield, including savings of about £170 million a year by
operating the sites as subsidiaries rather than contracting out their
management and the government indemnifying the decommissioning authority
against certain risks so it no longer needs to buy insurance. The
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said that the NAO’s report
showed “significant progress” had been made by Sellafield and the NDA
but “there is still more to do”.
Times 23rd Oct 2024, https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/energy/article/cost-overruns-at-sellafield-nuclear-waste-site-to-hit-136bn-zjklxk3p7
Alistair Osborne: Nuclear is waste of time and money
The National Audit Office has found that the Sellafield nuclear waste dump is still a mess,
with costs spiralling and projects delayed. As rebranding jobs go, it’s
hard to beat. Somehow, the nuclear lobby has managed to convince
politicians that the industry is not only green, but “clean”.
Just about all of them have fallen for it, not least our energy supremo Ed
Miliband. Here he is last month: “Homegrown clean energy from renewables
and nuclear offers us a security that fossil fuels simply cannot
provide”. On the energy security point, fair enough. But isn’t he
forgetting something about nukes that you don’t get with windmills and
sunbeams?
Luckily, the National Audit Office is not so easily taken in, as
it’s just proved with a nice reality check: its latest report on
Sellafield, the radioactive waste dump in Cumbria owned by the state-backed
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). True, there is a glimmer of good
news: the spending watchdog says the “management of major projects has
begun to improve”. But it must have been off a chronically low base,
given the problems the NAO finds.
As it notes, of the NDA’s 17 sites
“Sellafield is the UK’s most complex and challenging”: home to
“seven former nuclear reactors” and Britain’s “entire stockpile of
civilian-owned plutonium”. Indeed, much of the “highly hazardous”
stuff knocking around has been deemed by the government to “pose an
intolerable risk”. Cleaning it up is a thankless task, too. On NDA
estimates, it “will take until 2125”.
Times 23rd Oct 2024, https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/nuclear-is-waste-of-time-and-money-ljmxhqklh
Fears salt marsh plan could lead to ‘destruction’ of Severn Vale
Gazette, 21st October 24
THERE are fears plans for new salt marshes linked to the construction of nuclear power plant Hinkley C would lead to “wholesale destruction of the Severn Vale”.
EDF bosses have been severely criticised for their environmental improvement plans in Gloucestershire which are linked to the new Hinkley C site in Somerset.
Their original plan for Hinkley Point was to install an acoustic fish deterrent system to scare fish away from the site as the Bristol Channel is home to numerous species such as eels, herring, salmon and sprats.
However, the French government-owned energy firm feel this will no longer be viable and have instead drawn up alternative plans to create salt marshes along the River Severn.
In the area, they have identified sites in Arlingham and Littleton Upon Severn near Thornbury in South Gloucestershire.
Other proposed sites include Rodley near Westbury-on-Severn in Gloucestershire and Kingston Seymour in Somerset.
But the proposals, which were aired at a recent parish council meeting, have been met with strong opposition in the Severn Vale.
David Seal, a local resident, believes the plans would “likely bring an end to most ideas of future development of the village, farming, farmland, miles and miles of hedgerow, trees and just about everything we all love about the green serenity of the village”.
“All this to ‘offset’ Hinckley C destroying 182 million fish in the estuary per year over 60 years,” he said.
“EDF has all the technical know-how to dig two enormous cooling water tunnels 3.3km out under the Bristol Channel, yet they say it’s ‘too risky’ to fit an acoustic deterrent to mitigate the problem at source in the same estuary.
“What is too risky is messing about with the River Severn and destroying the land we and nature live off…………………………………………………….
https://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/24665869.fears-salt-marsh-plan-lead-destruction-severn-vale/
Sellafield cleanup cost rises to £136bn amid tensions with Treasury
National Audit Office questions value for money as predicted bill for decommissioning increases by £21bn
Alex Lawson and Anna Isaac, Wed 23 Oct 2024 , https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/23/sellafield-cleanup-cost-136bn-national-audit-office
The cost of cleaning up Sellafield is expected to spiral to £136bn and Europe’s biggest nuclear waste dump cannot show how it offers taxpayers value for money, the public spending watchdog has said.
Projects to fix buildings containing hazardous and radioactive material at the state-owned site on the Cumbrian coast are running years late and over budget. Sellafield’s spending is so vast – with costs of more than £2.7bn a year – that it is causing tension with the Treasury, the report from the National Audit Office (NAO) suggests.
Officials from finance ministry told the NAO it was “not always clear” how Sellafield made decisions, the report reveals. Criticisms of its costs and processes come as the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, prepares to plug a hole of about £40bn in her maiden budget.
Europe’s most hazardous industrial site has previously been described by a former UK secretary of state as a “bottomless pit of hell, money and despair”. The Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation in late 2023 revealed a string of cybersecurity problems at the site, as well as issues with its safety and workplace culture.
The NAO found that Sellafield was making slower-than-hoped progress on making the site safe and that three of its most hazardous storage sites pose an “intolerable risk”.
The site is a sprawling collection of buildings, many never designed to hold nuclear waste long-term, now in various states of disrepair. It stores and treats decades of nuclear waste from atomic power generation and weapons programmes, has taken waste from countries including Italy and Sweden, and is the world’s largest store of plutonium.
Sellafield is forecast to cost £136bn to decommission, which is £21.4bn or 18.8% higher than was forecast in 2019. Its buildings are expected to be finally torn down by 2125 and its nuclear waste buried deep underground at an undecided English location.
The underground project’s completion date has been delayed from 2040 to the 2050s at the earliest, meaning Sellafield will need to build more stores and manage waste for longer. Each decade of delay costs Sellafield between £500m and £760m, the NAO said. Meanwhile, the government hopes to ramp up nuclear power generation, which will create more waste.
Sellafield is owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), a taxpayer-owned and -funded quango. The NDA believes the cost of decommissioning Sellafield could range from £116bn to £253bn, depending on the length and complexity of the cleanup.
Plans to clean up three of its worst ponds – which contain hazardous nuclear sludge that must be painstakingly removed – are running six to 13 years later than forecast when the NAO last drew up a report, in 2018. The NAO said deteriorating buildings, Covid restrictions, staffing and equipment breaking down were to blame. Sellafield had “retrieved much less waste than it had planned” since 2020, it said.
Sellafield could spend more on demolishing buildings earlier to be more efficient and offer better value for money, the NAO said.
One pond, the Magnox swarf storage silo, is leaking 2,100 litres of contaminated water each day, the NAO found. The pond was due to be emptied by 2046 but this has slipped to 2059. The Guardian investigation revealed it could continue leaking until 2050.
The NAO said: “Sellafield has demonstrated that it can remove safely the most hazardous waste, but is not progressing quickly enough to meet its plans.”
Last year, Sellafield defied the Treasury and without consultation increased its headcount from 11,200 to 12,000, despite previous commitments to reduce its employee numbers by becoming more efficient, the report said.
In one blunder, Sellafield paid out £2.1m more in staff bonuses than it should have done – about £200 a person – in 2023. This was paid after a management decision that the NAO suggests was questionable.
Sellafield had expected to replace a testing facility that is more than 70 years old and in “extremely poor condition”, but after racking up £265m over more than seven years the project is under review amid concerns over delays and the condition of buildings on the site. The NAO said this was the single biggest risk to Sellafield’s future, as workers needed to carry out many different regular scientific tests.
Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “Despite progress achieved since the NAO last reported, I cannot conclude Sellafield is achieving value for money yet, as large projects are being delivered later than planned and at higher cost, alongside slower progress in reducing multiple risks.”
He added: “Continued underperformance will mean the cost of decommissioning will increase considerably, and ‘intolerable risks’ will persist for longer.”
This month, Sellafield was fined £332,500 for cybersecurity failings and the chief magistrate in the case, Paul Goldspring, said it fell into a category “bordering on negligence”.
The NAO said the nuclear site had again admitted that its cybersecurity efforts were falling short.
David Peattie, the NDA’s chief executive, said: “Sellafield is one of the most complex environmental programmes in the world. We’re proud of our workforce and achievements being made, including the unprecedented retrieval of legacy waste from all four highest hazard facilities.
“But as the NAO rightly points out there is still more to be done. This includes better demonstrating we are delivering value for money and the wider significant societal and economic benefits through jobs, the supply chain and community investments.”
Secrecy over radioactive pollution from nuclear bases
The Ferret, Rob Edwards, October 22, 2024
The Ministry of Defence has blocked the Scottish Government’s environmental watchdog from releasing information about radioactive pollution from the Clyde nuclear bomb bases for the last nine years.
Emails released under freedom of information (FoI) law reveal that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) asked the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) not to publish information about “environmental issues with radioactivity” at Faslane and Coulport near Helensburgh to protect “national security”.
In response to FoI requests from The Ferret, Sepa has refused to release more than 20 files about radioactive problems at the bases since 2016, and redacted others. We have appealed to the Scottish Information Commissioner, David Hamilton…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Sepa’s refusal to release the files is under investigation by the Scottish Information Commissioner, following two appeals by The Ferret in August and September 2024.
‘Difficult’ to withhold information about radioactive pollution
Now, in response to another FoI request, Sepa has released email correspondence with the MoD about The Ferret’s FoI requests on Faslane and Coulport. These show that the MoD asked Sepa not to publish certain files.
Sepa emailed the MoD in October and November 2023 with files it proposed to release asking whether they “should be disclosed”. The MoD replied on 27 November saying that “HQ colleagues” wanted information withheld, though exactly how much or what has been redacted……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Secrecy over radioactive pollution ‘unacceptable’
Professor Campbell Gemmell was Sepa’s chief executive between 2003 and 2012 when it released more than 400 pages about safety at Faslane and Coulport. The MoD were “very challenging to deal with”, he recalled.
He said: “The UK ministry applied pressure repeatedly on radioactive waste issues seeking to keep relevant environmental information out of the public domain. Putting similar effort into remedy would be better.”………………………….
The Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament pointed out that it was well known that the four nuclear-armed Vanguard-class submarines based on the Clyde were ageing and overstretched. They were more likely to leak, argued the group’s co-vice chair, David Kelly.
“This information is not a threat to national security. But it is a threat to the image of a responsible Ministry of Defence, that pollutes our environment with ever-increasing amounts of radioactive isotopes in the name of keeping us safe.”………………………………………………………………………………………………………
https://theferret.scot/radioactive-pollution-clyde-nuclear-bases/
‘Millions of fish could die’ under current Hinkley Point C plan
Environmental advocates demand EDF takes action
By Lewis Clarke, Somerset Live , 22nd Oct 2024
A solutions-focussed, scientifically backed answer to the critical environmental situation at Hinkley Point C has been released by a coalition of scientists, engineers, and innovators, showing that the Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD) is both a necessary and feasible requirement for the builders of Hinkley Point C – EDF Energy – to apply.
An AFD Delivery Report, launched on October 16, gives evidence that the AFD can be installed safely and effectively in the Severn Estuary. It highlights the innovations in technical ability, technology, logistics, and science which will reduce maintenance times from 72 days per year down to just 19. The report debunks common misconceptions about noise levels, diving time, and more with scientifically backed evidence, and urges EDF to ensure the system is installed, tested, and operational before the station starts to abstract cooling water.
In light of the critical environmental situation at Hinkley Point C, a parliamentary debate led by Sir Ashley Fox MP was held last week on Wednesday 9th October 2024. During the debate, Sir Ashley Fox addressed that EDF Energy’s mosaic of mitigation measures, specifically the proposed saltmarsh plans, are a completely illogical choice.
The saltmarsh plans are a proposed alternative to the Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD), a system designed to protect aquatic life by deterring fish from entering the cooling systems of the power plant, and was included in the initial design plans of Hinkley Point C.
The AFD system remains mandated in the Development Consent Order (DCO). It is also considered best practice for screening estuarine intakes in the UK by the Environment Agency, and has been scrutinised by a Welsh Government Report (2021), a Public Inquiry (2022), and the ruling by Secretary of State Kwasi Kwarteng (2022) which all stated that the AFD must be installed. EDF Energy has been working to remove this vital environmental protection measure for nearly eight years, arguing on the grounds of health and safety concerns, noise pollution and effect on mammals, and further delay of the completion of Hinkley Point C.
The AFD Delivery Report provides a solution to the current impasse, but without the AFD, it has been warned by the Welsh Government Commission that approximately 182 million fish would be killed annually, including sensitive species like shad, sprat, Atlantic salmon, and herring.
In the AFD Delivery Report, Professor Mark Everard, University of West of England says “There can in my scientific view be no justification for removal of AFD. It makes absolutely no sense to permit very substantial damage to marine biodiversity and hope then that modest mitigation entailing a degree of recruitment only of species reliant on the saltmarsh can offset it.
“Cost reduction is cited by EDF as one element of its plan to remove the mandated AFD and would appear to be its principal consideration, but one that obviously overlooks the vital purpose of deflecting fish from the intake. Ideally, saltmarsh restoration should be implemented ADDITIONALLY to the AFD to mitigate the still substantial likely entrainment of multiple life stages of fish and invertebrates, even with deflection from the intake.”
South Gloucestershire Council understands that EDF will make another application to the Secretary of State to remove the requirement for an AFD in the new year, and so has written to the Secretary of State for Energy, Security & Net Zero, the Rt Hon Ed Milliband, requesting that he upholds the existing requirement to install an AFD.
Councillors Maggie Tyrrell and Ian Boulton, said in their letter to the Secretary of State: “We are writing to express our gravest concern regarding the scale of impact on the migratory fish populations of the Severn Estuary Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which will result from the massive water abstraction at Hinkley Point C of 120,000 litres of seawater a second for 60 years once the power station is operational.
“This impact would be made significantly worse by the proposed application for a change to the 2013 Development Consent Order to remove the required Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD).
“A Welsh Government report on the AFD cites evidence that removal of the AFD would capture at least 182 million fish per year, a significant proportion of which would be killed. Put simply, removing the AFD would cause critical levels of wildlife destruction.”
The council is also concerned that EDF are approaching local landowners about a plan to create new salt marshes, which they would propose as alternative compensation habitat for fish in place of the AFD. It is understood that local landowners are deeply concerned about the idea, which has been turned down in other areas when raised by EDF, and experts query EDFs claims that new saltmarshes would offer suitable habitat for fish killed by the water intake of the new power station.
The council’s letter also highlighted that even with the AFD, that compensation will still be needed as some fish will still be drawn into the intake and killed. Alongside the letter, the Secretary of State was also provided with information about priorities to deliver improvements for fish passage in the Bristol Avon river and Coastal Catchments……………………
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/millions-fish-could-die-under-9641529
‘Nuclear waste would be disaster for our seaside’
BBC News, Paul Murphy, Environment Correspondent, 21 Oct 24
Campaigners opposed to plans for a nuclear waste disposal site on the Lincolnshire coast say it could be “disastrous” for the seaside economy.
The former Theddlethorpe gas terminal on the Lincolnshire coast is one of three sites being considered for an underground facility.
Guardians of the East Coast (GOTEC) said a survey of more than 1,000 visitors to the resorts of Mablethorpe and Skegness found the “great majority” would be put off coming to the area.
GOTEC said it had carried out “extensive research” into the potential impact of the facility.
The group has produced a 60-page booklet called The Nuclear Option.
According to chairman Mike Crookes, the facility would “blight this area” and the economic impact on tourism could be “profound” and “catastrophic”.
“The tourism industry in this area brings £600m of economic benefit and 8,000 jobs,” he said. “We need to protect this at all costs.”
A survey of 1,100 people along the coastline from Mablethorpe to Skegness, carried out by GOTEC, found “83% of them would not visit this area if that facility was built”, Mr Crookes added.
NWS is considering the site for what is known in the waste industry as a geological disposal facility (GDF).
Other possible sites have been mooted in Hartlepool and Cumbria………………………………………………………………………..
Most of the radioactive waste generated by the UK’s nuclear power stations is being temporarily stored at Sellafield in Cumbria, but longer term storage is needed for substances that remain hazardous for many thousands of years.
The idea of a nuclear waste site, or GDF, was first proposed for Theddlethorpe more than three years ago.
Local councillors have called for a referendum on the development.
According to the Theddlethorpe GDF Community Partnership, a facility would only be built in an area where the community “demonstrates if it is willing to host one”, following a “test of public support“, such as a referendum or consultation.
…………………………………… “The government has committed to providing multi-million-pound investment to the community that hosts a GDF. This investment could support better transport links which could help to enhance tourism in a local area.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4d3y33y3go
Nuclear lobby continues to infiltrate education
Pupils from Alde Valley Academy have joined the Sizewell C Youth Council.
This initiative aims to provide the nuclear power project with insights
into the needs of local young people. The students, from Years 7 to 11,
will have regular meetings with joint managing director, Julia Pyke, and
other project leaders. They will discuss local needs, aspirations, and the
project’s progress. Julia Pyke, Sizewell C joint managing director, said:
“Consultation for big infrastructure projects can sometimes be skewed
towards older people.
East Anglian Daily Times 21st Oct 2024
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/24658473.alde-valley-academy-pupils-join-sizewell-c-youth-council/
Councillors raise concerns over fish populations at Hinkley C
Forty-four tonnes of fish could die every year once the site is running
South Gloucestershire Council have raised concerns over the potential loss
of wildlife at Hinkley Point C as bosses propose installing saltmarsh land
in parts of North Somerset and Gloucestershire. EDF energy, who run the
nuclear power station at Hinkley C, are planning to build the habitat to
compensate for the 44 tonnes of fish that could die every year once the
site is running. But land owners and councillors in South Gloucestershire
have raised concern about the loss of wildlife and the health of the
region’s rivers.
Rayo 18th Oct 2024,
https://hellorayo.co.uk/greatest-hits/bristol/news/hinkley-south-gloucestershire-letter/
Some Types of Pollution Are More Equal than Others
There is a BIG taboo around Radioactive Pollution. We published a report last June into acid mine pollution alongside radioactive pollution in Whitehaven Harbour – so far ignored by mainstream media.
Marianne Birkby, Oct 20, 2024 https://radiationfreelakeland.substack.com/p/some-types-of-pollution-are-more?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2706406&post_id=150473856&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Whitehaven Mine Pollution- Report by Radiation Free Lakeland – evidence to inform Authorities in future mitigation/prevention regarding mine pollution
The Westmorland Gazette and other local press have today published a feel good article about beach cleans in Cumbria. So far so good but the beaches contain far more insidious and long lived pollution than plastic, in the form of radioactive wastes from decades of Sellafield’s operations. In Whitehaven Harbour these radioactive wastes are literally magnified by the presence of the ongoing acid mine pollution pouring into the harbour. Instead of addressing this ongoing pollution event the local MP Josh MacAlister is greenwashing the ongoing devastation by bigging up Whitehaven as the West Coast Riviera and fizzingly pushing for a ferry service while boats are understandably leaving because of the visible acid mine pollution.
Less visible is the “historic” radioactive pollution still pouring out of Sellafield with more radioactive waste arriving almost daily.
First ex-Royal Navy nuclear submarine to be disposed of enters final dismantling phase.
Navy Lookout 15th Oct 2024 https://www.navylookout.com/first-ex-royal-navy-nuclear-submarine-to-be-disposed-of-enters-final-dismantling-phase/
Work has started on the third and final phase of the project to dismantle ex-HMS Swiftsure. As the demonstrator project for the dismantling programme, she will be the first former RN SSN to be fully disposed of.
The glacial project to safely scrap the growing fleet of decommissioned boats has finally begun to make some progress at Rosyth in the last few years. Each submarine will undergo a three-step process which involves Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) being removed first. The second and most demanding stage involves the removal of the Reactor Pressure Vessel that holds the reactor core and is classed as Intermediate Level Radioactive Waste (ILW).
Work has started on the third and final phase of the project to dismantle ex-HMS Swiftsure. As the demonstrator project for the dismantling programme, she will be the first former RN SSN to be fully disposed of.
The glacial project to safely scrap the growing fleet of decommissioned boats has finally begun to make some progress at Rosyth in the last few years. Each submarine will undergo a three-step process which involves Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) being removed first. The second and most demanding stage involves the removal of the Reactor Pressure Vessel that holds the reactor core and is classed as Intermediate Level Radioactive Waste (ILW).
Swiftsure’s disposal is a notable achievement as the first Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) anywhere in the world to be dismantled. Other nations use a much simpler process and cut the entire reactor compartment out of the submarine and transport it structurally complete for burial in land storage facilities. The US has successfully disposed of over 130 nuclear ships and submarines since the 1980s. The Russians have disposed of over 190 Soviet-era boats (with some international assistance) since the 1990s while France has already disposed of 3 boats from their much smaller numbers.
Besides the progress with Swifsure, LLW has been safely removed from ex-HMS Resolution, Revenge and Repulse. As experience has been gained working on successive boats techniques have been refined and more waste has been managed to final disposal at reduced cost. The optimisation of the process allowed 50% greater tonnage of waste to be removed in 75% of the time it took for Swiftsure. So far the work has been completed safely on budget and on time. Work has yet to begin on ex-HMS Dreadnought, Churchill and Renown still afloat in the basin at Rosyth.
While there is positive progress at Rosyth, 14 Dock at Devonport is still not ready to accept the first boat to begin defuelling and dismantling. There are now 15 decommissioned submarines filling up the basins in Plymouth (soon to be 16 when HMS Triumph goes in 2025). Work to get rid of this legacy cannot start soon enough. At least the lessons learned in Rosyth should give the teams at Devonport an advantage although the majority of these boats still have their nuclear fuel on board and will have to undergo a 4-stage process.
Apollo Global Management Inc in Talks to Partly Finance EDF’s Hinkley UK Nuclear Power Plant
By Aaron Kirchfeld, Silas Brown, and Francois de BeaupuyOctober 15, 2024
(Bloomberg) — Apollo Global Management Inc. is in talks with Electricite de France SA to provide financing for a nuclear power plant under construction in the UK, people with knowledge of the matter said.
The alternative asset manager has held early discussions about providing a complex mix of equity and debt that may total billions of pounds, the people said, asking not to be identified because deliberations are private.
EDF has been holding meetings with a series of investors including investment firms, sovereign wealth funds and infrastructure specialists to raise as much as £4 billion ($5.2 billion) through a deal that would give investors a stake in the Hinkley Point C project, Bloomberg News reported last week. Centrica Plc. is one of the companies considering investing.
The estimated cost of building Hinkley has risen to as much as £47.9 billion in current terms, due in part to lingering labor shortages and supply chain issues. The first of the two reactors at the site is scheduled to become operational in 2030 — five years later than initially planned — under EDF’s base-case scenario.
Talks about financing Hinkley are at an early stage and may not result in a deal, the people said. Representatives for Apollo and EDF declined to comment………………… https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/10/15/apollo-in-talks-to-partly-finance-edfs-hinkley-uk-nuclear-power-plant/
North Somerset MP objects to salt marsh at Kingston Seymour
North Somerset Times 16th Oct 2024
NORTH Somerset’s MP, Sadik Al-Hassan, objects to the creation of a salt marsh in the corner of his constituency, claiming his constituents are being “shut out of the conversation.”
The proposed salt marsh at Kingston Seymour, which sits on the boundary with the neighbouring Wells and Mendip Hills constituency, is one of four sites earmarked on the Severn Estuary by EDF as environmental mitigation measures for its construction of Hinkley Point C. The other sites include Littleton, Arlingham and Rodley………………………………………….. https://www.northsomersettimes.co.uk/news/24657962.north-somerset-mp-objects-salt-marsh-kingston-seymour/
1 This Month
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
